The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.

Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?

Cuba will not stamp American passports but will issue a page instead. Wise American citizens usually chuck those pieces of papers before re-entering the US.

Israel will usually issue a page instead of a stamp to visitors, especially if they are to visit other countries in the region.

It is the question of mutual recognition.

Americans cannot go to Cuba.

Regulation does not limit travel of U.S. citizens to Cuba per se, but it makes it illegal for U.S. citizens to have transactions (spend money or receive gifts) in Cuba, under most circumstances. The regulations require that persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction be licensed in order to engage in any travel-related transactions pursuant to travel to, from, and within Cuba. Transactions related solely to tourist travel are not licensable.

This is according to the U.S. Department of State: "Cuban Assets Control Regulations are enforced by the U.S. Treasury Department and affect all U.S. citizens and permanent residents wherever they are located.

TAIPEI, Taiwan -- China has enraged several neighbors with a few dashes on a map, printed in its newly revised passports that show it staking its claim on the entire South China Sea and even Taiwan.

Inside the passports, an outline of China printed in the upper left corner includes Taiwan and the sea, hemmed in by the dashes. The change highlights China's longstanding claim on the South China Sea in its entirety, though parts of the waters also are claimed by the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Brunei and Malaysia.

India on Friday termed as 'unacceptable' China depicting Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin as its territory in maps of the country on their new e-passports, a step that led to retaliatory action by New Delhi.

China sprung the surprise on India when it showed these territories as part of its own in the maps on their new e-passports.

The Indian Embassy in Beijing responded by issuing visas to Chinese nationals with a map of India including Arunachal and Aksai Chin as part of its territory.

In India's first official reaction, External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid said,"We are not prepared to accept it."

"We, therefore, ensure that our flags of disagreement are put out immediately when something happens. We can do it in an agreeable way or you can do it in a disagreeable way," he told a TV channel.

China, on its part, sort of fudged the issue with its Foreign Ministry Spokesperson saying that the matter should be dealt with in a 'level headed and rational manner' to avoid 'unnecessary disruptions' to people to people exchanges.

China is, as per the English language, is doing Cartographic Aggression.

'Cartographic aggression' is the term by which the victim country describes any act, in particular the publication of maps or other material by a neighbouring country, which purports to show part of what it perceives as its own territory as belonging to the other country.

China’s official maps have long included Taiwan and the South China Sea as Chinese territory, but the act of including those in its passports could be seen as a provocation since it would require other nations to tacitly endorse those claims by affixing their official seals to the documents.
Presidential Office spokesman Fan Chiang Tai-chi (范姜泰基) said President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) hoped China would not take inappropriate action to break the hard-earned stability across the Taiwan Strait.
Fan Chiang said the two famous tourist destinations are “under the jurisdiction of the Republic of China [ROC] government and not under the control of China.”
He said Ma had instructed the Mainland Affairs Council to issue a statement on the issue.
Fang Chiang said the government promotes cross-strait exchanges on the basis of “not recognizing each other’s sovereignty and not denying each other’s right to rule.”

Now I am not talking about who's right whos wrong. I am just saying it's a big F-you written all over it.

And what part of "if you walk over McMahon line, we'll kick your ass" is subtle?
--- says Zhou Enlai.

You are entitled to your views and there is nothing one can do about that.

However, the facts I have laid on the table with links and it is for all to judge.

If it is a Big F.... as you claim, well then it is a Big F that the various newspapers around the world is writing. It is not something I have conjured. Maybe it would be more appropriate to give facts to support your views rather than uncharitable outburst without rationale and into a void since that does no good to man or beast or to the debate.

This is after all a debate and neither you nor I are in a position to dictate terms to the various countries as to how to conduct themselves. At least, I don't claim such influence to do so. Therefore, let us give our views backed with facts and go along to understand the events.

Do give link as to what you claim Chou en Lai said, if indeed he said so.

The subtlety is obvious if one has read the Bandung Conference. and the subsequent events. It really requires no elaboration.

However, you seem to understand the rationale of the Chinese action or so you wish to imply.

Do be good enough to unravel what we find is rather unusual and mysterious. I am sure then we shall understand the situation better as you seem to have understood.

"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

By becoming each countries most important trading partner or second most. This automatically creates a pro-china lobby in each country that keeps their leaders in check. China does not need to aggress anybody they just require everybody to stay out of any conflict that may arise in the future. This serves to dent or delay an anti-China alliance from building up.

US tries the same, become important or most important trading partner of China's neighbours as well.

Now if ever the G2 square off, which country will want to join the fray ? They will want to retain relations with both. Neutral also means neither of the G2 will attack you. There will be trade & supplies disruptions.

China bets nobody or very few join up. If the US has fewer takers, then China retains an advantage in her back yard.

Here is the puzzle.

Is it better to make more money (+china trade) or less money (less china trade) and be safer (+US hedge).

If more countries choose the second option then China loses the bet.

So until such time China must create incentives or shape the neighbours behaviour to her advantage. Wear them down over a long time. Today how many countries are opposing, in 2015 , in 2020 and so on. How long can the neighbours continue to hedge with the US.

Originally Posted by Ray

Soon the major part of the US naval fleet will shift from the Middle East to the Asia Pacific region.

Will the US bite though ?

It would unecessarily spook the chinese into an arms race with the region also following suit.

Originally Posted by Ray

Therefore, it will become a tinderbox and the Communist Chinese aggressive initiative is hardly worth its while to act as a match to the fire.